If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Good article, and mirrors exactly what I've been arguing on C2E for some time now: people just don't want to raise kids in a 2 bedroom apt. My wife and I would love to live downtown, but since I work from home, a 850sq/ft 2bdrm would drive me insane. A 2-story condo with some common space on both levels would provide much needed separation for most people, and allow for "adult" space and "kid" space.

Of course, that's just the home part. As touched on in the article, once the kid is old enough to adventure on their own, there's not much in the way of places for them to go and have fun.

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

This idea of families living 'downtown'. We could be using the wrong terminology here. I can see young singles living 'downtown' but families, not so much. What we should encourage is families living on the edges of downtown. When a person thinks of downtown they think of commerce, hustle and bustle, lots of traffic. They don't see places where kids can play or hang out, at least not right downtown. Any increased activity on the edges of a downtown core will translate into a better downtown proper. Change the ads to 'Great family living close to downtown'. Instead of 'Great family living in the downtown core'. People with kids can't get their heads around that. We are not New York.

It depends on your perspective of downtown. In the media, downtown is often reported as the CBD and every neighbourhood that surrounds it, from The Quarters, North Edge, McCauley, Oliver... and others...

This idea of families living 'downtown'. We could be using the wrong terminology here. I can see young singles living 'downtown' but families, not so much. What we should encourage is families living on the edges of downtown. When a person thinks of downtown they think of commerce, hustle and bustle, lots of traffic. They don't see places where kids can play or hang out, at least not right downtown. Any increased activity on the edges of a downtown core will translate into a better downtown proper. Change the ads to 'Great family living close to downtown'. Instead of 'Great family living in the downtown core'. People with kids can't get their heads around that. We are not New York.

Yeah, downtown should be reserved for pinstripe suit workaholics and homeless people. Outsiders are allowed in after dark to drink the beverages.

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

^We are talking about families living downtown. Not your average office/construction/blue collar/homeless with money/ Joe/Jane having a beer after work or on the weekends. The way our downtown is at the moment it's not configured to accommodate kids say between the ages of 8-17. Let's face it, a land developer downtown would not build a playground on prime downtown land. Where is the profit in that for him/her. Now, building for families on the edges of downtown stands a far greater chance of being successful than catering to families right downtown. Of course, this all depends on your perspective of what the core of downtown is.

Yeah, downtown should be reserved for pinstripe suit workaholics and homeless people. Outsiders are allowed in after dark to drink the beverages.

There needs to be balance though. If parents want to bring kids downtown to live, that's fine by me. But, I don't want them then complaining that the bars shouldn't stay open, or that there is too much night life, or that there is too much noise from the party in the condo/appartment next door, or that .... I don't want downtown sanitized to the point where adults can't have an adult playground.

^We are talking about families living downtown. Not your average office/construction/blue collar/homeless with money/ Joe/Jane having a beer after work or on the weekends. The way our downtown is at the moment it's not configured to accommodate kids say between the ages of 8-17. Let's face it, a land developer downtown would not build a playground on prime downtown land. Where is the profit in that for him/her. Now, building for families on the edges of downtown stands a far greater chance of being successful than catering to families right downtown. Of course, this all depends on your perspective of what the core of downtown is.

Uh... Grandin has this. We, downtown Edmonton community league, are working on a climbable art piece to be included in the new park we are working on at 105st and 102ave. Keep an open mind with what is there now and what could serve various family needs in a non traditional way.

A climbable art piece is hardly something a 12 - 17 year old will want to climb. That age group needs outdoor basketball courts, soccer fields, outdoor/indoor arena etc: Even kids of climbing age will tire of one play area in a park. What's a non traditional way?. You tell me.

Do 12 to 17 yr old climb on playgrounds.... Or climbing walls in gyms. The monkeys in vancouver are climbed on ball people of all ages and love them.

Basketball courts are in grandin and oliver and i hope to get court downtown. Fields... You mean like in Oliver, rossdale, river dale.

Outdoor skating at city hall, river dale, Vic park, hawr, outdoor hockey in river dale, queen mary, west mount.

I must admit you do do your homework. Areas you have mentioned I would consider on the edge of downtown Oliver, Rossdale, etc:
Your thread is about making downtown family friendly. My stance is families find living downtown unfriendly. From a point of view of the city trying to get people to live downtown they are using the wrong language. They should encourage people to live on the edge of downtown. Which is most of the areas you have mentioned above. They should be marketing it as 'Come live close to downtown' instead of saying to families 'Come live downtown'. Close to downtown for families sounds more appealing.

As mentioned, those areas are "downtown" with respect to the topic, semantics.

You could ask 'What's in a name'. When you say 'downtown' most people think of heavy traffic, traffic lights, blocked intersections, no trees or grass in fact, a concrete jungle is what most people think. Not to appealing to family living. Now you mentioned neighborhoods like Oliver, Grandin, Rossdale, Riverdale etc: All perfectly good names so why are they lumped under the generic moniker of 'downtown'. It sounds far more appealing for families if someone says 'Live in the urban setting of Rossdale' rather than say 'Live Downtown'. Downtown should be reserved for the business sector, shops, offices. Call the hoods around it what they are actually named.

As mentioned, those areas are "downtown" with respect to the topic, semantics.

You could ask 'What's in a name'. When you say 'downtown' most people think of heavy traffic, traffic lights, blocked intersections, no trees or grass in fact, a concrete jungle is what most people think. Not to appealing to family living. Now you mentioned neighborhoods like Oliver, Grandin, Rossdale, Riverdale etc: All perfectly good names so why are they lumped under the generic moniker of 'downtown'. It sounds far more appealing for families if someone says 'Live in the urban setting of Rossdale' rather than say 'Live Downtown'. Downtown should be reserved for the business sector, shops, offices. Call the hoods around it what they are actually named.

I live 'right downtown' with a well used family park across the street, spectacular walking/playing grounds at the leg 3 blocks away, 2 day cares nearby, mature trees, wide sidewalks with benches. There are quite a surprising number of young kids and mothers out, many obviously newer residents of Canada which may explain their familiarity with urban + family space. Can we do more to make downtown and central areas more family friendly, hell yes, but I think we truly overlook the ability to raise a family in the core. I plan to stay downtown.

Downtown should not be 'reserved' for anything specific or traditionally found there necessarily.

It's not like there needs to be a football field right on Jasper. I grew up in a suburb, and my closest park was 5 or 6 blocks away, and it only had 4 trees on it, and I climbed those 4 trees a million times. Kids aren't morons, they'll find fun in unlikely places, and will travel to get to the fun.

If I was a kid living in the Icon, I'd have no problem meeting my buddies downstairs, hopping on our bikes or skateboards, and making our way to one of the larger parks in Oliver to play some football, climb stuff, or beat the heck out of each other for fun, hit the Macs for a slurpee, and make it home safe and sound.

To be family friendly, I think the city needs to ensure that road crossings are properly lit, traffic is managed well, they keep drunks and aggressive bums off the streets, establish full-scale community policing to keep all citizens (especially children) safe, and keep the whole downtown clean so curious kids aren't picking up needles and whatnot.

Also, letting kids ride bicycles and skate on sidewalks would go a long way. As it is now, fun is banned downtown unless you're over 18 and in a licensed establishment.

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

I also think we have this wonderfully propagated xenophobic response to downtown strangers being worse than a neighbor in riverbend and that unless we drive our kids around at halloween, they will be exposed to nothing bad things.

Growing up with 2 parents working I recall being out on my bike or taking the bus all over from the end of elementary/beg of jr. high on.

While visiting NYC/Brooklyn, I was amazed at how many kids there were on the subways alone or with a friend. Awesome.

Yeah, downtown should be reserved for pinstripe suit workaholics and homeless people. Outsiders are allowed in after dark to drink the beverages.

There needs to be balance though. If parents want to bring kids downtown to live, that's fine by me. But, I don't want them then complaining that the bars shouldn't stay open, or that there is too much night life, or that there is too much noise from the party in the condo/appartment next door, or that .... I don't want downtown sanitized to the point where adults can't have an adult playground.

The most recently memorable disputes over club noise/hours were instigated by downtown hotels not families.

Plenty of families can easily live in a townhouse/ rowhouse/ 3BR condo in Oliver, Grandin, Westmount or Queen Mary Park. Not the downtown 'core', but with all its attractions and (a few) of its vices. For those who want a bit more suburban feel, try Spruce Ave or Prince Rupert. Downtown doesn't just mean bachelor pads and bums

Downtown doesn't have the right condos for families (unfortunately). I am willing to live in a 2 bedroom plus den with a family... even if it is only 900 sq ft. However, the last 2 bed plus den I looked at downtown cost 598 000.... out of range if I want to start a family and have one parent stay at home.

Here is what we need to make downtown more family-friendly (and Oliver/Glenora/Grandin even if they are already on their way in that direction):
- Cool playgrounds. Not the boring suburban ones... playgrounds that are art pieces.
e.g. Playground One (Not my taste but the idea works), Playgrounds 2-4- Safe Playgrounds: In my travels I have seen many playgrounds that are fenced with a sign saying "only guardians and children under 13 may play here". The age would change, but basically it gave cops a reason to kick drunks and smoking teenagers out of the playgrounds. This would be great in some of downtowns rougher parts - Condos that aren't bigger, just planned better for families: 900 sqft can fit a 3 person family, and 1100 can easily fit a four person family. The problem is that they won't fit into a 2 bedroom. We need 2beds plus den or a 3 bedroom.
- Affordable Housing: This is something that I struggle with. I hate the idea of affordable housing in one sense (I have seen so many areas where affordable housing has ended up meaning "houses that look like crap because people had just enough money to buy but not enough money to keep it looking decent") but let's face it: most new parents can't afford a half a million dollar house when they are about to have kids or have a newborn. Mat leave salary isn't usually that great.
- Larger Police Presence: Cops everywhere! Not in a weird Big Brother way, but in a community way. I know I am not explaining myself well, but I love it when I walk down a downtown street and a police officer says Hi, or asks about my dog or something. I know this isn't part of the "job" but it makes me feel safer to both see them and to make them seem like friends of the community rather than some kind of military presence.
- Guarantees for our Schools: While we do have some good downtown(ish) schools (Grandin Elementary, St. Catherine's, Mother Theresa, Glenora, Riverdale, Vic, Oliver) it can be worrisome to think that those schools may be closed. The whole Riverdale-kindergarten debacle is a prime example.
- Pet-Friendliness: This a minor one but I do think it would help. One of the reasons I am resistant to buying a downtown condo (even though I presently rent one) are all the pet-restrictions and the lack of off-leash areas that are fenced off for dogs. I have a dog now, but most condos don't allow large dogs. I want the big family dog when I have kids. I also want to be able to go to a fun fenced off dog area... the river valley is fantastic, but some breeds have too strong of prey instinct to be safely let off leash in that area (too many bunnies!).

A lot of things that would make downtown more family-friendly would make it more fun for adults too. Safety would make the nightlife a lot less sketchy and a lot more fun... while I am not into clubbing I would love to be able to sit on a patio in mid-summer at midnight sipping some wine... without a pandhandler bugging me for change. Interesting playgrounds and park areas are fun for everyone.... look at the leg grounds or the City Hall wading pool!

My spouse and I were recently thinking about moving back to the Oliver area, but we just couldn't get over the fact that we just wouldn't want our son to go to the park alone. We lived close to Kitchener park sadly before they upgraded the spray area (which would have been awesome for him). It may be an irrational fear, but in our circle we're the closest ones to have wanted to raise our children in a "urban" environment, everyone else wants to go to the edges of the city. Also the fact that there aren't many 3 bedrooms or what I would say is affordable townhouses in Oliver makes it tough too, though I understand my affordable is not the same other peoples.

Quote:
Twenty-five percent of the total number of dwelling units shall be suitable for families with small children, as defined in Guidelines for High Density Housing for Families with Children adopted by City Council May 30, 1989.
From the Coal Harbour ODP
Quote:
Twenty-five percent of the total number of the basic residential allowance of dwelling units shall be suitable for families with small children, as defined in Guidelines for High Density Housing
for Families with Children adopted by City Council May 30, 1989, and as amended from time to time.

Even as well back as 74 the city's False creek ODP
Quote:
(d) Household Mix – The following household types should be provided as basin-wide objective:
Families with children 25 percent
Couples (young and mature) 25 percent
Elderly 15 percent
Singles 35 percent
The SEFC ODP required 25%,35% and even 50%.
Quote:
(i) with respect to families, 35% of the residential units in areas 1A, 2A, 3A, and 3B, and 25% of the residential units in areas 1B, 2B, and 3C are to be suitable for families with small children, in accordance with the High-Density Housing for Families with Children Guidelines adopted by Council on March 24, 1992;
(j) with respect to the affordable housing units in areas 1A, 2A, and 3A, priority is to be on family housing, with 50% of the non-market units to be suitable for families with small children, and integration of the units into each residential area;
(k) 25% of the market housing in areas 1A, 2A, and 3A, and 25% of the modest market housing in areas 1A and 3A, are to be suitable for families with small children; and

The city will explore an incentive program that would see developers get a grant to build some high rise three bedroom apartments.

It's to give larger families a housing option they don't have now, because three bedroom homes are too expensive.

"It's not rocket science to believe we can come up with some inducement plan for that third bedroom," said Mayor Stephen Mandel while asking for a report during an executive committee.

"It might encourage people to develop it. If we do the first 300 or 200 or 100 or 50, but in restricted areas so we'd have to do it in high rises downtown; obviously on the airport lands, we don't want to start doing it every place because then it defeats the purpose."

Councillor Bryan Anderson wants to take it one step further, by creating residential housing on top of commercial properties.

In a 'What if?' moment, Anderson wonders what would have happened if there was housing at South Edmonton Common?

"Even if all of the owners and all of the tennants cooperated to build 'employee suitable' I think it would have been amazing instead of having people standing out trying to find rides when their place of business shut down to get home, we could have had a variety of different kinds of needs that would have made mixed use of residential above commercial very viable in this city."

Anderson says the Currents at Windermere in Edmonton's south west once considered something like that, but isn't pursuing it right now.

I just can't see 10g a unit for this being an incentive. As per the CCDP, I can see it spurring typical unit construction though. The EFCL is also working on family friendly housing strategies and will be presenting recommendations to exec comm this fall I believe. What we need is to design smaller 3 bdrms or 2 plus dens that don't need 1200 sqft. I have been in some in van at 900 sqft.

^why? Plus... keep in mind that in new concrete even with mid level finished you are in the 400+sqft. (probably more in the 425)

1200 = 480k min

1500 = 600k min

Sure those are good sizes, but unaffordable for most families. There is no reason why you cannot do a well planned 2 + or 3bdrm in under 1000. Keep in mind this is where common areas come into play as well as public space around the building and in the neighbourhood.

People generally think they need a bigger space than they actually do. I find that when people are forced to settle into a smaller space (due to budget or availability), they quickly adapt and tend not to care to expand. I've lived with a roommate in a 700 sqft space, and we never thought it was small, and we even hosted friends that visited us. It just makes you more efficient and less of a packrat. And the nice thing is that it controls your spending by forcing you to consider whether whatever purchase you are going to make is worth the room it will take hahah.

Back in the day when larger families were expected, the houses were smaller than they are now. I was raised in what would seem a small house by today's standards, but I don't remember feeling space deprived. Especially as I had my own attic room (my brother had the other half of the attic).

The bad weather has me organizing the winter months for my pre-schooler. Looking for indoor playgrounds (drop-in activities) I discovered the Don Wheaton Y does not have ANY winter programs/drop-in gym time for children besides some swim lessons. That's a problem if you're living downtown with an active toddler and don't want to drive to hell and gone to one of the private indoor playgrounds.

The Kinsmen has a drop-in playground but as a transit user Kinsmen sucks.

To the DECL crowd, perhaps this is somewhere to put some energy if you're looking to expand your family oriented offerings.

The bad weather has me organizing the winter months for my pre-schooler. Looking for indoor playgrounds (drop-in activities) I discovered the Don Wheaton Y does not have ANY winter programs/drop-in gym time for children besides some swim lessons. That's a problem if you're living downtown with an active toddler and don't want to drive to hell and gone to one of the private indoor playgrounds.

The Kinsmen has a drop-in playground but as a transit user Kinsmen sucks.

We ran into that at as well when we lived DT with our first child. Even looking for babysitting while we worked out at the gym in the evening the Y dt didn't offer anything.

In my community North Glenora there is an indoor playground in our community hall most weekdays if your interested, only 1$ drop in or $20 for all winter I believe, pretty accessible from downtown via bus as well.

The bad weather has me organizing the winter months for my pre-schooler. Looking for indoor playgrounds (drop-in activities) I discovered the Don Wheaton Y does not have ANY winter programs/drop-in gym time for children besides some swim lessons. That's a problem if you're living downtown with an active toddler and don't want to drive to hell and gone to one of the private indoor playgrounds.

The Kinsmen has a drop-in playground but as a transit user Kinsmen sucks.

To the DECL crowd, perhaps this is somewhere to put some energy if you're looking to expand your family oriented offerings.

I've just found this very informative thread after encountering unexpected difficulties trying to relocate my family to Edmonton. The problem already raised about a lack of 3-bedroom units is certainly something I encountered, but even worse is that so many of the units I looked at were in buildings that have restrictive covenants against children. In case you are interested, I cut and paste text (below) from a letter I wrote to the mayor about the issue, though whether he can do anything about it, I'm not sure; I'm still learning about all the different constraints to raising a family in Edmonton. We'll be moving to a condo on 104 street this fall--it wasn't ideal, but it was the best we could do. In terms of the debate above about what constitutes downtown and whether the very center of town is suitable for families, I guess it depends on the individual; my family currently lives in a very urban neighborhood (more so than anything anywhere in Canada, probably including Toronto) and we just love it. I'm not asking that Edmonton become New York or London, but city leaders should recognize that as Edmonton continues to mature, it will attract families who value urban living.

Dear Mayor Iveson,

[...]

I grew up in Edmonton during the 1990s. I left the city for university and have had the opportunity, through work and study, to live in some of the world’s most dynamic urban centers: London, Paris, Osaka, San Francisco, and most recently Chicago. I have, however, always called Edmonton home and it was thus with great excitement that my young family found out we would be moving back to Edmonton this fall. Since my suburban, car-centric upbringing I have grown to value immensely the virtues of pedestrianized urban living: this is true in terms of health and recreation; the environment; finances; the prospects of small businesses; community sociability; and overall convenience and quality of life. This conviction has become even stronger as I’ve become a husband and father. I can’t think of anything more annoying than having to strap a struggling toddler into a car seat whenever we want to do groceries or go out for lunch. In addition, though I realize I might be in the minority on this point (old slogans like “Albertans love their cars” have an almost talismanic power), I find the climate and snowfall in Edmonton to be particularly ill-suited to having to drive everywhere (Scandinavia demonstrates the virtues of urban, pedestrian living in a cold climate). Why drive on ice and snow to an enormous parking lot (South Edmonton Common comes to mind) only to have to walk the same distance to a shop or restaurant than one would have to in a dense urban environment?

When we recently visited Edmonton on a house-hunting trip, we accordingly wanted to live in the downtown core or in Oliver, where we would be able to continue the lifestyle that we so value. In particular we were attracted to the Grandin area for its high-density residential development, its leafy and salubrious streets, its proximity to the LRT and to our wonderful river valley and its many green spaces. There was, however, a recurring problem that persistently frustrated out attempts to find a home: age restrictive covenants. Despite the fact that there are very few three-bedroom condos in the city, we were happy to make do and purchase a two-bedroom condo, and we found several that we liked. One, in particular (in the Grandin Manor) we fell in love with. But in each case we were stymied by “adult only” restrictions. This is something I have never encountered in any other city. On the one hand I recognize the need for assisted living homes for the elderly, but I am totally perplexed by the fact that the majority of homes we looked at in Edmonton had restrictions against children. I find the legality of all this rather dubious, though I am not qualified professionally to comment. What I do know is that such restrictions serve to impoverish an urban community. Children are the lifeblood of any society, they are the future, they are what most people, at some point in their lives, come to value above all else. A community that prevents children from living in it is bound, literally, to be sterile. It will be a place void of any vibrancy or dynamism. Segregated cities are always the more impoverished for it: this applies to race and social class, but it also applies to age. Diversity is almost always a virtue, and if downtown Edmonton is to become a dynamic, livable community, it is vital that city leaders do everything possible to lift any sort of restriction that prevents families from living in the core of our city.